Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 29, 1983)
Page 2/The Battalion/Tuesday, November 30,1983 N $ How the U.S. press was routed in Grenada by Art Buchwald The swift, bloodless victory by our armed forces over the entire American press corps in the Battle of Grenada will go down in history, as far as many Americans are concerned, as President Reagan’s finest hour. Government officials have lifted the lid of secrecy as to how it was accomplished. One of them told me, “We couldn’t have done it without the support of the American people. For some time our intelligence sources indicated the media was vulnerable to a surprise attack. There was great dis satisfaction in the country with the constant drumbeat of bad news the people were get ting from their press and electronic sources. The so-called ‘free press’ forces were percieved as a bunch of thugs hiding behind the ‘people’s right to know’ liberal Marxist doctrines.” “So your people decided it was the right moment to overthrow the First Amend ment.” “It wasn’t that simple. We needed an excuse to take on the press. If the adminis tration could dramatize the media threat to the country, and prove the government was a much more dependable source of in formation, the Reagan administration could win the hearts and minds of the people. Of course every administration has wanted to launch a preemptive strike against the media, and it’s been war-gamed in the White House situation room for years. But President Reagan was the first one willing to take the risk.” “It must have been a tough decision for him.” Letters: Old South and what it implies Editor: Mr. Stephen Weiss has once again come out with ridiculous charges of severe pre meditated acts of racism at Texas A&M. The statement that the Confederacy (with a capital “C“) stood for only one thing — slavery — is ridiculous! The following should help Mr. Weiss to understand the true picture of the South and slavery. Robert E. Lee not only freed the slaves under his control, but he had declared that slavery was “a moral and political evil. ” This great man was convinced that in time, “the mild and melting influence of Christianity,” rather than war, would solve the problem. What about the soldiers who marched behind Lee? Remember, only one in fifteen of the Southern whites ever owned slaves. There were fewer than 350,000 Southern slave owners, but there were some 600,000 soldiers in the Confederate army. When the Southern states were finally forced to assume their separate and equal stations in the world and secede from the U.S., they did not sacrifice unity for slav ery, but for the princi pl e of self- government! Abraham Lincoln was correct when he said, “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the ex isting government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or over throw it.” This man, who is credited with the eman cipation of the Negro (which he did not do) should also be known for his public feelings towards blacks, “I will say that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races.. .and inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of su perior and inferior, and I as much as any other man, am in favor of having the super ior position assigned to the white race.” (September 18, 1858 in his fourth debate with Stephen A. Douglas) We do not deny you your heritage, nor do we support racism or slavery, but we do love our heritage and to this day support the expression of guaranteed freedom denied to our forefathers. Please do not remove the traditional symbol of a magnificent and noble way of life and freedom just to pacify those ignor ant to the lessons of history. Mark A. Brown (Editor’s note: This letter was accompanied by 67 signatures.) History lesson Editor: The Nov. 21 letter from Stephen Weiss and his co-signers concerning the slave sales at bonfire time, the Confederacy, and the Rebel flag is more racist than the tradi tions they oppose. I have never before heard an educated person, in particular a history major, insult the Confederacy by saying that it stood for slavery. The Confederate States of America did not stand for slavery. I have been taught that it stood as the separation of the agri cultural Southern states from a system that was encroaching on and attempting to des troy the only way of life ever known by them because parts of it were morally wrong. Slavery was a major issue, but it was actually destined to be short lived anyway. Very few Southern citizens could even afford to have slaves. This was reserved for the wealthy plantation owners, who insti tuted chattel slavery in order to make their farms profitable. Technological advance ment in agriculture would have eventually done away with the need for slave labor in the South, just as industrialization did in the North. The Confederate battle flag waves as a symbol of the struggle and determination put forth by men who fought and died to preserve their rights and to defend their land, their families, and their way of life. And this is something to be damn proud of. The Confederacy and the Civil War were just as important to Texas history as any other event, and the Rebel flag should fly just as high and just as long as any of the other five flags over Texas. As a native Texan, born and raised here in Dixie, I hope to see the Confederate spirit live a long time, and the Rebel flag forever fly ... even in the traditions at Texas A&M. James Elzner ’87 The Battalion USPS 045 360 Memlvr <>t Texas Press Association Southwest journalism Conference Editor Hope E. Paasch City Editor Kelley Smith Assistant City Editor Karen Schrimsher Entertainment Editor .... Rebeca Zimmermann Assistant Entertainment Editor Shelley Hoekstra News Editors Brian Boyer, Kathy Breard, Kevin Inda, Tracey Taylor, Chris Thayer, Kathy Wiesepape Photo Editor Eric Evan Lee Staff Writers Robin Black, Brigid Brockman, Bob Caster, Ronnie Crocker, Elaine Engstrom, Kari Fluegel, Tracie Holub, Bonnie Langford, John Lopez, Kay Denise Mallett, Christine Mallon, Michelle Powe, Stephanie Ross, Angel Stokes, Steve Thomas, John Wagner, Karen Wallace, Wanda Winkler Copy Editors Kathleen Hart, Susan Talbot Cartoonists Paul Dirmeyer, Scott McCullar Photographers Michael Davis, John Makely, Dave Scott, Dean Saito, Cindi Tackitt The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper tor students in reporting, editing and photography clas ses within the Department of Communications. Questions or comments concerning any editorial matter should be directed to the editor. Letters Policy L.etters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in length, and are subject to being cut if' they arc longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author's intent. Each letter must also be signed and show the address and telephone number of the writer. Columns and guest editorials also arc welcome, and are not subject to the same length constraints as letters. Address all inquiries and correspondence to: Editor, The Battalion, 210 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M Uni versity, College Station TX 77843, or phone (409) 845- 261 I. 'The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holi day and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are $ 16.75 per semester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. 7 he Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting news paper operated as a community service to Texas A&A/ University and Bryan-College Station. Opinions ex pressed in The Battalion are those of the editor or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M University administrators or faculty mem bers, or of the Board of Regents. United Pjess International is entitled exclusively to the use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it. Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. . “When you’re dealing with the news, there are no easy ones. For example, we knew an all-out frontal assault on the Amer ican media would not work in a peacetime environment. The American people tend to get very nervous if your launch an attack on the media when no lives are at stake.” “Don’t tell me you invaded Grenada just to give the American press a bloody nose?” “No, Grenada fell into our laps. We had to go in there anyway, so we decided we might as well mop up the media at the same time. We used as our textbook the British military operation in the Falklands. Maggie Thatcher was able to rout the entire British press corps with minimal casualties to her government. A secret study by Her Majes ty’s Forces indicated the British people were far more content to hear the news of the fighting from the government officials than they were to read eyewitness dispatch es in their paper and see television film of the action. “But,” he continued, “we also knew we had to complete the Grenada action fast, because the American people would only stand for a news blackout for just so long before they would start asking questions. Once we worked out the policy we turned it over to the military for execution.” “The Joint Chiefs must have been elated with the assignment.” “They were thrilled. The Navy was assigned to prevent all press landing by sea. The Air force was ordered to send back chartered planes. The Rangers were in structed to knock out any shortwave radios operating on the island. Not one television crew managed to get ashore. We held the information high ground for three days. It Sit’s too 1e ;said Moi gave us time to put out the story t ill the Ti< wanted it told. When the presidentwt: Station the air Thursday to give his report by Baft We’ve go! dirty laun we need dry. inc; an xnuiJiLiay hid itpu ' American people bought the whole “Apparently by going into Grenadi not only sent a message to the Soviet] Cubans, but to the American pressas “You might say that. The Reagan got ment is no longer a paper tiger as fara media in this country is concerned proved for the first time a well-armed,! ly disiplined military force can routal demoralized press corps without oiiej beling fired.” “Then from your standpoint, tlie free invasion was worth it.” “This is only the beginning. You la seen anything yet.” Chemis is refer e Univei mdienee interestt dnnor’s femic Al O'Connor s A&M yob as dii |er certaii ild teach ss he ap] :hing. Hi hand in i 'The onl by Bat er a yei Salvadi ly and m< doubt of n govern] Charles | U.S. tn [lie aboul America In March he guerr ■front in E Wimon p Bself poli nly missic ledical car )position-c ^tonday onsored b ents a: aside pi n to tl gs in Ci I’ve bei Clemei manist; ador bei isponsib lemenl Reagan’s challengers look weak nmg y< irforming ing mol cholera ath amc [cation o ration liderabl American voters are undecided by Maxwell Glen and Cody Shearer In only four weeks, they add, Reagan successfully turned his greatest liability — WASHINGTON — Americans paused briefly last week to gather together, give thanks and eat heartily. Inevitably, they’ll also have chewed the fat. As sure as Macy’s pneumatic Bullwinkle floated down Fifth Avenue on Thanksgiving morning, talk of politics certainly creeped into the discussion at many dinner tables around the nation. And, with less than a year before the next election, that talk re vealed that many Americans still haven’t made up their minds about the president. Pollsters of all stripes agree that Reagan currently has much for which to be thankful. They point out that his approval rating, calculated by some to be upwards of 70 per cent, is at its highest level in two years. could easily make mincemeat out of lesser-known contenders. Indeed, Reagan’s record may ln| important at this juncture than his styi leader. As three weeks of homage to F. Kennedy have just underscored, icans like their leaders self-confident sy and sometimes bold. Reagan firmed the old idea that one man can | a difference,” restoring for manyril faith in the political process and the as a whole. One of < is speal e myths Jut El Sa Clement nk the gc is a den s publi said, ele with d 'n El Sal an ide iped wl is stopp is not Ronald Reagan has been a favorite topic for debate at any time of year. His irrepress- able good nature and penchant for banker’s hours have set a new standard for national leadership that is, if nothing else, curious. handling of foreign policy — to his advan tage. He enhanced his image as a strong, effective leader and gained a windfall as public approval spilled over into other areas, a phenomenon that pollsters call the halo effect. ” For better or for worse, “made a difference” on a numbercr That accomplishment, more other, may be his meal ticket to fouit years in the White House. But on the eve of a presidential election season, the Reagan record is perhaps more debatable than ever. Inflation and interest rates are down marketly since 1980, but their improvement may have more to do with cyclical demand than supply-side eco nomics. While Reagan has worked to cut domestic spending, defense dollars have climbed through the roof. Though the pres ident has won a clear political victory in Grenada, U.S. policy in the Middle East and Central America — two places where U.S. troops seem destined for ongoing police duty — suggests far less certain suc cess. Reagan’s own coyness about 1984 is itself a metaphor for his record. Slouch Yet, two of every three Americans be lieve that the Marine engagement in Beirut is doomed to fail. Meanwhile, according to the ABC News polling unit, a majority (54 percent) says that Reagan is trying to do too much militarily. An even larger segment disapproves of overthrowing Marxist reg imes overseas, a fact which weakens the domestic appeal of other Grenada-like op erations. Such paradoxes are natural fodder for the homespun “Turkey Caucuses” on Thank sgiving weekend. Though these annual dis cussions among friends and families often go overlooked, this year’s could prove cru cial to many a political fortune. Pollsters of all stripes agree that Reagan currently has much for which to be thank ful. They point out that his approval rating, calculated by some to be upwards of 70 percent, is at its highest level in two years. Tracking reaction to his Oct. 28 speech on Lebanon and Grenada, they found that it reversed a slight downward trend and, in a single stroke, earned him as much as 20 percent in new support (though almost en tirely male). Reagan’s vulnerabilities in foreign policy widen with women voters, who since early last year have shown less inclination than men to support the president. The gender gap, which according to one White House study has more than 22 different roots, has in fact evolved into a resilient creature, widening to 18 points after the president’s Lebanon-Grenada speech. Planning to take full advantage of this discrepancy during the next year, feminists say that a margin of only 15 points would mean Reagan’s defeat. Pollsters agree that such talk is not mere bravado. At Turkey Caucus time, however, the president’s goose is hardly cooked. The alternatives, after all, aren’t exactly appe tizing: front-runner Fritz Mondale remains about as appealing as yams; John Glenn lacks the right stuffing; Alan Cranston, de spite all his jogging, looks like the tradition al main course. According to polls, Reagan 7 think I made a mistake, be have done better if I had M them as a pair. ”